Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of ,

Prepared for:

City of Toronto Parks, Forestry & Recreation City of Toronto Parks, Forestry & Recreation 399 The West Mall, 355 Lesmill Road, Toronto, Ontario M9C 2Y2 Toronto, Ontario M3B 2W8 Tel. 416-394-2486 Tel. 416-392-0380 Fax: 416-394-8935 Fax: 416-392-6658

Archaeological Licence P049 (Steiss) MCL CIF P049-448-2009 ASI File 09SP-49

September 2009

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the High Park “Bike Pit” and Picnic Area 7, has been carried out in advance of any park management activities that may result in landscape alterations in either area. The Stage 1 assessment entailed consideration of the proximity of previously registered archaeological sites, the original environmental setting of the park, and its nineteenth- and twentieth-century development history. The Stage 2 assessment involved completion of test pit surveys within both areas. No archaeological remains were encountered during the field investigations. Accordingly, this report recommends that the Bike Pit and Picnic Area 7 may be cleared of any further archaeological concern, with the proviso that the appropriate authorities must be notified should deeply buried archaeological or human remains be encountered during any future work on the property.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICES INC.

PLANNING DIVISION

PROJECT PERSONNEL

Project Manager: Mr. David Robertson, MA Senior Archaeologist

Project Director: Ms. Debbie Steiss, MA (P049) Senior Archaeologist & Partner

Field Director: Ms. Andrea Carnevale, BSc (R314) Staff Archaeologist

Field Archaeologist: Mr. David Robertson

Report Preparation: Mr. Brian Narhi, MA Project Historian Mr. David Robertson

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... i PROJECT PERSONNEL...... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS...... ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 STAGE 1 BACKGROUND RESEARCH...... 2 2.1 Physiographic Setting...... 2 2.2 Previous Archaeological Research...... 4 2.3 The Predevelopment Landscape and Aboriginal Archaeological Resource Potential ...... 5 2.4 The Nineteenth-Century Development of High Park ...... 6 3.0 STAGE 2 FIELD SURVEY...... 11 3.1 The Bike Pit...... 11 3.2 Picnic Area 7 ...... 13 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 13 5.0 SOURCES ...... 15

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: The location of the “Bike Pit” and Picnic Area 7 in High Park...... 1 Figure 2: Nineteenth- and twentieth-century mapping of High Park and its vicinity...... 8 Figure 3: The Stage 2 assessment of the Bike Pit and Picnic Area 7...... 12

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Archaeological Services Inc. was retained to conduct a Stage 1-2 archaeological assessment of two small areas within High Park for the purposes of ongoing park management. The first of these, known informally as the “Bike Pit” is located in the southeast corner of the park, west of the Lower Duck Pond. It is a forested area that has been extensively damaged as a result of the unauthorized construction of bike trails, ramps and jumps (Figure 1). The Bike Pit was assessed as a preliminary to any future planning actions to be taken by parks staff, be these remediation and restoration or formalization of the current uses. The second location to be assessed, designated Picnic Area 7, is located to the north of the Grenadier Restaurant in the west-central portion of the park (Figure 1). The picnic facilities that are present are to be removed and the area is to be replanted. Both areas measure approximately 350 m2.

Figure 1: The location of the “Bike Pit” and Picnic Area 7 in High Park. NTS Sheet 30M/11, ed. 7, 1985

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 2

This assessment was conducted under the project direction of Ms. Debbie Steiss under archaeological license P049 (MCL CIF P049-448-2009) issued pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act (2005). Mr. David Robertson served as the Project Manager for the study. Permission to access the study areas and carry out the activities necessary for the completion of the assessment was granted by City of Toronto Parks, Forestry & Recreation on September 4, 2009. All work was carried out in a manner consistent with the requirements of the 2009 final draft of the Ministry of Culture’s Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (MCL 2009).

2.0 STAGE 1 BACKGROUND RESEARCH

2.1 Physiographic Setting

Topography

High Park is located within the Iroquois Plain physiographic region of southern Ontario. The Iroquois Plain region is the former lake bottom of glacial Lake Iroquois, and as such, the terrain generally consists of sand plains dissected by a series of steep-sided glacial ravines that have cut through the flat to rolling tablelands and carry the watercourses that drain into contemporary (Chapman and Putnam 1984).

The sediment substrate of this area consists of four primary bodies (Sharpe 1980), which are, from top to bottom: 5-10 m, approximately, of sand, deposited in shallow waters of Lake Iroquois about 13,000 BP; ~20 m of shallow-water (deltaic) deposits (sand) of the Scarborough Formation dating to at least the middle Wisconsinan period of glaciation (~70,000 BP); 0-5 m, approximately, of deeper-water deposits (silt, clay); and till of middle Wisconsinan and older origins.

It is possible that flutings and drumlinized surfaces in underlying till, or tills, have influenced surface contours in this area. Halton Till, on the surface of which these features are commonly seen, is not recorded anywhere in section in the vicinity of High Park (Sharpe 1980, Westgate et al. 1999:17). It is more likely, therefore, that topography in High Park has been influenced by the effects of wind and water on the overlying Lake Iroquois sands.

During the period when Lake Iroquois was most active (at around 12,000 BP), sands were concentrated in bars, especially in former . A number of prominent bars were recorded in the early twentieth century in this area before they were removed by quarrying (Coleman 1933:36-39). These bars were a result of erosive and depositional east-to-west currents along the north shore of Lake Iroquois. Following the sudden lowering of the level of Lake Iroquois, to about 100 m below current Lake Ontario levels at about 11,400 BP (Anderson and Lewis 1985, Coakley and Karrow 1994), these sand deposits were exposed to wind erosion and re-deposition in the course of being reworked by streams. The main channels, such as the Humber River, began incising into the former lake plain to reach the new Lake Ontario base level. Where incision was prevented by local bedrock sills (Georgian Bay Formation shale), or other non-erosive substrate obstacles, lateral channel movement likely occurred. This fluvial activity (both vertical and lateral movement) probably continued until base level rose in Lake Ontario to current levels about 5000 years ago.

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 3

Channel movement in the Humber Plains likely contributed to the destabilization of the surface substrate—especially in places with sparser vegetation cover in this savanna-like region. This activity made the substrate susceptible to wind erosion along valley slopes and re-deposition along and behind bluff tops (i.e., the Humber River valley and lands to the east). The prevailing westerly winds mean that the Humber Plains to the east of the river are the main area of deposition. This phenomenon of valley- edge erosion and re-deposition in downwind areas has been observed in (Thorson and Tryon 2003). The same phenomenon may have caused re-deposition of easily eroded sands from the Humber Valley on uplands of the Humber Plain, accounting for accumulations of sand and silt and local uneven relief in High Park.

Hydrology

Glacial Lake Iroquois came into existence by about 12,000 B.P, as the Ontario lobe of the Wisconsin glacier retreated from the Lake Ontario basin. Isostatic uplift of its outlet, combined with blockage of subsequent lower outlets by glacial ice, produced a water plain substantially higher than modern Lake Ontario. Beginning around 12,000 B.P., water levels dropped stepwise during the next few centuries in response to sill elevations at the changing outlet. By about 11,500 B.P., when the St. Lawrence River outlet became established, the initial phase of Lake Ontario began, and this low water phase appears to have lasted until at least 10,500 B.P. At this time the waters stood as much as 100 metres below current levels. However, isostatic uplift was already raising the outlet at Kingston so that by 10,000 B.P., the water level had risen to about 80 metres below present. Uplift since then has continued to tilt Lake Ontario upward to the northeast, propagating a gradual transgressive expansion throughout the basin, flooding the mouths of the creeks and rivers that rim the basin –such as are preserved at Grenadier Pond (Anderson and Lewis 1985; Karrow 1967:49; Karrow and Warner 1988, 1990).

In the vicinity of the study area it has been estimated that the earliest Lake Ontario shoreline (circa 10,400 B.P.) was about five kilometres south of its present location. Over the following millennia, the shoreline gradually moved northward. Between about 5,000 and 4,000 B.P., the Nipissing Flood phase increased water levels to near or slightly above nineteenth century levels (Anderson and Lewis 1985; Weninger and McAndrews 1989). Levels subsided by three to four metres again between about 4,000 and 3,500 years ago, and by circa 3,000 B.P., the shoreline was established more or less in the location at which it stood in the early nineteenth century, approximately 125 metres south of the south boundary of the park.

Grenadier Pond is the largest of several ponds in the park, but has undergone a reduction in size, from an estimated 19 hectares to its current 14.2 hectares, due to urban development in the surrounding areas (UFS 2002). It is likely that the pond was originally separated from the lake by a sandbar, created by long-shore currents continuously transporting and re-depositing sediment along the shore. Waterflow through the outlet of the pond was probably insufficient to breach the emergent bar, leading to the development of a backwater pond. Periods of high water levels in the lake basin may have been marked by occasional flooding over the bar (UFS 2002). In the nineteenth century, the pond was more fully cut off from the lake by the entry of the Great Western Railway’s lines to the city. This work entailed extensive cutting and filling operations to create the rail right-of-way, as well as modifications to the Lake Shore Road. Thereafter, an outlet weir was installed to regulate water levels in the pond (UFS 2002). Further filling at the south end of the pond took place with the construction of in the

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 4

1940s. A small creek, known as Spring Creek drains the east half of the park. The south end of the creek is today occupied by a series of artificial sedimentation ponds (the Upper and Lower Duck Ponds) in an area formerly occupied by an open water pond or estuarine wetland created through similar processes to those operating at Grenadier Pond

Vegetation

Under the widely used ecological zonation developed for Ontario by Hills (1959), High Park is situated in Ecological District 6E. The climax forest in this region, under median moisture regimes and eco-climates, tends to be dominated by hard or sugar maple (Acer saccharum), and beech (Fagus grandifolia), often in association with red oak (Quercus rubra) and hemlock (Tsuga canadensis). Red maple (Acer rubrum), white oak (Quercus alba), white ash (Fraxinus americana), yellow birch (Betula lutea), balsam fir (Abies balsamea), white cedar (Thuja occidentalis), and American elm (Ulmus americana) are other species of intermediate importance in the climax forest. White pine (Pinus strobus), although classed as a mid- successional species, is moderately tolerant of shade and competition. It is therefore capable of maintaining a presence in subclimax and climax communities. Konrad (1973:126), using pre-European vegetational classes based upon species mentioned in association by early 19th century land surveyors, and the drainage preferences for those species, characterized the general area as having been covered by maple, oak, basswood, pine, hemlock and beech.

The most notable aspect of the vegetation habitats of High Park, however, is that the dry uplands supported black oak (Q. nigra) savannahs, or tallgrass woodlands (Varga 1989:1; UFS 2002). Less mesic sites support moist red oak forests intermixed with many southern and prairie, or savannah, species (Varga 1989:1), while the moist ravine bottomlands provide habitats for cool mixed swamps with many northern species (Varga 1989:2).

2.2 Previous Archaeological Research

In order that an inventory of archaeological resources could be compiled for the study area, three sources of information were consulted: the site record forms for registered sites housed at the Ministry of Culture; published and unpublished documentary sources; and the files of Archaeological Services Inc., including the interim report of the Master Plan of Archaeological Resources for the City of Toronto (ASI 2004). In Ontario, information concerning archaeological sites is stored in the Ontario Archaeological Sites Database (OASD), a database maintained by the Ministry of Culture. This database contains archaeological sites registered within the Borden system.

Under the Borden system, has been divided into grid blocks based on latitude and longitude. A Borden block is approximately 13 kilometres east to west, and approximately 18.5 kilometres north to south. A four-letter designator references each Borden block, and sites within a block are numbered sequentially as they are found. The study area under review is located within Borden block AjGu. No archaeological resources have been registered within either project area, while three have been registered within a radius of approximately one kilometre.

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 5

The Grenadier Pond site (AjGu-2) was a probable Late Archaic, Early or Middle Woodland cemetery site located to the northwest of the subject property. It was discovered, in 1921, on tablelands on the south side of in the vicinity of Ellis Avenue, west of High Park. The site was discovered during roadwork and was located on a prominent ridge that stood on the south side of Bloor near Ellis Avenue (Orr 1922). A single 90-cm deep grave contained eight or ten probably flexed interments accompanied by red ochre. A second grave located approximately nine metres away contained two groups of smaller bones that may have been juvenile burials. These too were covered in red ochre.

Located on the west side of the Humber River, the Treatment Plant site (AjGu-3) was registered by Victor Konrad, in 1971, as a Mississauga village and burial site, on the basis of a variety of nineteenth- century reports. The locational and cultural descriptions for the site are not necessarily reliable, but it is presumed that the site was destroyed by the construction of the Toronto sewage treatment plant.

The third registered site is spurious. It is referred to as the Bear Mound site (AjGu-54) and is said to be located next to the Grenadier Restaurant. The site was registered in 2003, by Amick Consultants Ltd., as a ceremonial/sacred earthworks complex associated with Early through Late Woodland and Seneca activities. There is no archaeological evidence in support of this identification (ASI 2008).

2.3 The Predevelopment Landscape and Aboriginal Archaeological Resource Potential

Water is arguably the single most important resource necessary for any extended human occupation or settlement. Since water sources have remained relatively stable in southern Ontario after the Pleistocene era, proximity to water can be regarded as the primary indicator of archaeological site potential. Accordingly, distance from water is one of the most commonly used variables for predictive modelling of archaeological site location. Within the City of Toronto, care must be taken to identify watercourses that have long since been diverted into the City’s storm and waste water management systems.

The Ministry of Culture primer on archaeology, land-use planning and development in Ontario (MCL 1997:12-13) stipulates that undisturbed land within 300 metres of a primary water source (lakeshore, river, large creek, etc.), and undisturbed land within 200 metres of a secondary water source (stream, spring, marsh, swamp, etc.), as well as undisturbed land within 300 metres of an ancient water source (as indicated by remnant beaches, shorecliffs, terraces, abandoned river channel features, etc.), are considered to have archaeological potential.

This basic potential model has been further refined for the City of Toronto, as part of the City’s Master Plan of Archaeological Resources, currently in development. The Interim Master Plan of Archaeological Resources for the City of Toronto (ASI 2004) lists proximity to water as one of the indicators of potential for the presence of precontact Aboriginal archaeological sites. According to the model in development, land within 250 metres of an extant or formerly mapped river or creek, or within 250 metres of the pre- development shoreline of Lake Ontario, has potential for the presence of precontact Aboriginal archaeological sites. In addition, this potential is extended to any floodplain land, and to land in close proximity to the Lake Iroquois strand (i.e., land above and within 200 metres of the strand, or below and within 100 metres of the strand).

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 6

As noted in Section 2.1, High Park was drained by several small streams and significant ponding characterized the Lake Ontario shoreline, which lay just over 100 metres south of the park. The presence of these features undoubtedly influenced Aboriginal site selection processes in the area. On this basis, as well as on the basis of the presence of two precontact archaeological sites within one kilometre of High Park, those lands within the park that have not been subject to modern disturbances may be deemed to exhibit archaeological potential.

2.4 The Nineteenth-Century Development of High Park

The land which encompasses present day High Park is composed of parts of Lots 36, 37 and 38 Concession 1 From the Bay, as well as their respective Broken Fronts. This land was converted from Registry to LTCQ in February 2003 as PIN 21372-0183. The land use history of Lot 38 is not reviewed in this report, as the Bike Pit and Picnic Area 7 are located on Lots 36 and 37 respectively.

High Park was noted as one of the “sylvan beauty” spots of Toronto. As early as 1891, it was described as “the beautifully wooded resort of the citizens, and the munificent gift of the late Mr. J.G. Howard, an old resident” (Adam 1891:54).

Tradition relates that because Howard’s lot was the highest point of land in the area, he suggested that it be called “High Park” rather than “Howard Park” although both names appear to have been used for a time (Martyn 1978:93).

Early patent plans show that Lot 36 was retained as a Reserve, which was patented by King’s College in January 1828. The Broken Front lot was originally patented by George Percival Ridout on November 6, 1844.

Ridout (1807-1873) was the son of George and Mary Ann (Wright) Ridout, and the nephew of Thomas Ridout, the surveyor general of Upper Canada. He was born in England, and immigrated to Philadelphia with his parents in 1820. By 1826, he was employed by the British firm of Tarratt’s, iron and hardware merchants, in Philadelphia, and later still in their New York office. In 1828, G.P. Ridout moved to York, Upper Canada, where he studied law although he was apparently not called to the bar. By 1832, G.P. Ridout was joined in York by his brother, Joseph Davis Ridout. They entered into a wholesale and retail iron and hardware business, Ridout Brothers and Company, which was the first wholesale firm that specialized in hardware in York. Located at King and Yonge Streets, it became one of Toronto’s “largest hardware houses” during the second and third quarters of the nineteenth century. This firm was later managed by Messrs. Aikenhead and Crombie. In 1837, Ridout captained a company of York militia during the Rebellion. He ran for public office as a conservative in 1844 but withdrew from the race. He was elected to the House of Assembly in 1851, and retained his seat until 1854. He was elected to City Council as an alderman for St. Andrew’s Ward in 1848, and held this office in 1849 and 1851. He served as a school trustee for St. Andrew’s in 1850. He was the president of the Toronto Board of Trade (1844- 1852), president of the St. George’s Society (1845-1847). He was a member of the Board of Directors for the Toronto and Lake Huron Railway when this company was chartered in 1845. In 1853, he became governor of the British America Assurance Company. He retired from his hardware business in 1866, and

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 7

concentrated on his duties with the Assurance Company and was elected manager in 1871. He died unmarried in June 1873 (Scadding 1873:378; Blackett Robinson 1885[2]:137-139; Middleton 1923:226, 247, 504, 539, 795-796; Firth 1966:75; McCalla 2000).

A strip of land at the south end of this lot, containing approximately two acres, was sold by Ridout to the Hamilton and Toronto Railroad Company in December 1853. This line was better known as a part of the Great Western Railway, now part of CN Rail.

In January 1876, following the death of G.P. Ridout, a Vesting Order certificate was granted by the High Court of Justice which cleared the way for the ownership of this lot to be transferred to the City of Toronto (York deed #6396). The City of Toronto acquired approximately 170 acres of land from the Ridout estate, which was later added to High Park.

Period maps, such as the Browne (1851) and Tremaine (1860) maps of York and the map of the area that appears in the1878 Miles & Co. Illustrated Historical Atlas show relatively little development activity on this land during the Ridout tenure (Figure 2).

The Browne map (Figure 2) shows that the northerly one-third of the lot, abutting Bloor Street, remained wooded in 1851. Two buildings located on the west side of (Parkside Drive) about one-third of the way down the east side of the lot from Bloor Street appear to have been constructed sometime between 1860 and 1878. They are clearly shown on the Goad’s Atlas map of 1884, but not on the 1890 rendition (Figure 2). One or both of them may have been demolished during the intervening period.

A single structure, located approximately where these buildings stood, was shown opposite Constance Avenue (now Constance Street) on the Goad’s Atlas maps of 1893 and 1910 (Figure 2). It remained standing until at least 1923 (Goad’s Atlas 1884 plate 36, 1890 plate 45, 1910 plate 58). Other structures were built upon Lot 36 in High Park during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These consisted of two structures on the west side of Keele Street (Parkside Drive), slightly more than half-way along the length of the park. They were constructed sometime between 1884 and 1890. They are labeled as the “restaurant” and “pavilion” on the Goad’s Atlas of 1910. They remained standing until at least 1923 (Goad’s Atlas 1910 plate 55).

Lot 37 Concession 1 FB and Broken Front

The Broken Front lot was originally patented by John George Howard on September 24, 1839. Early patent plans show that Lot 37 was retained as a Reserve, which was patented by King’s College in 1828. This land was purchased by Howard in 1836 from King’s College, with the original intention of using it as a sheep farm.

Browne 1851 Miles & Co. 1878 Tremaine 1861

Unwin, Brown & Sankey 1883

Howard 1875

Goad’s Atlas 1884 Goad’s Atlas 1890 Goad’s Atlas 1910-1912 Goad’s Atlas 1923-1924 VARIOUS SCALES 528 Bathurst St. T 416-966-1069 APROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF THE “BIKE PIT” Toronto, Ontario F 416-966-9723 AND PICNIC AREA 7. ASI PROJECT NO.: 09SP-49 DRAWN BY: DAR Canada, M5S 2P9 [email protected]/www.iAS±.to DATE: SEPT 21, 2009 FILE: 09SP-49 figure 2.ai Figure 2: Nineteenth- and twentieth-century mapping of High Park its vicinity. Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 9

Howard (1803-1890) was a native of Hertfordshire, England. He appears to have been an illegitimate child, and he assumed the surname of his step-father, “Corby,” in the early 1820s. Howard in later life claimed direct descent from the Dukes of Norfolk, one of whom was surnamed Corby after one of their family estates. Howard spent time at sea when he was a young man, and learned to become a carpenter and joiner at that time. He was later articled as an apprentice to William Ford, a architect, who later married Howard’s sister. In 1827, Howard married Jemima Frances Meikle in London, England. In September 1832, Howard changed his name and emigrated to York, Upper Canada. He was appointed to teach geometrical drawing at Upper Canada College in early 1833, and he was appointed first drawing master at the College in 1839. He remained part of the College faculty until 1856. During the 1830s and 1840s, Howard was commissioned to undertake private surveys such as that of Toronto Harbour. He also designed many important houses, shops, offices, churches and other institutional structures during this period, including St. James’ Cemetery in Toronto, as well as in various other communities in Canada West. Perhaps his most important commission was the Provincial Lunatic Asylum in Toronto which was built between 1845 and 1849. It is estimated that there are more than 700 of his architectural drawings in existence and, as one eyewitness observed, “truly the man was indefatigable.” Howard served in the York Militia, and assisted in defending the City during the Rebellion of 1837. He served as surveyor and engineer for the City of Toronto between 1843 and 1855. He was a founding member of the Toronto Society of Arts. He served as a local magistrate, and was the president of a copper mining operation on Serpent River.

Howard had semi-retired by 1855, and occupied his time with developing his home, , and the surrounding grounds. Colborne Lodge was constructed in 1837, and is important as one of the earliest and best surviving examples in Toronto of the small, suburban villa or Regency Cottage style of dwelling which was popular in Britain during the nineteenth century. This house is unique, featuring a verandah which is the focus of the front façade and an interior octagonal parlour. This home proudly boasted one of the first interior bathrooms in Toronto with running water, although it was the subject of some controversy among the members of Toronto society at that time. The house was slightly modified in about 1843, when the roof was extended to accommodate additional sleeping quarters and the triple flue chimney was added. A second addition was made at the rear of the house around 1865. The house was constructed where it could take advantage of the vistas towards Lake Ontario. The house, which was nearly demolished, was restored by the Toronto Branch of the Women’s Canadian Historical Society in 1925. Keys to the restored house were formally turned over to the City in 1927 (Martyn 1978:89-96; Cruikshank and DeVisser 2003:36-37).

No structures are depicted on Howard’s property on either the Browne or Tremaine maps. The north one- third of the lot, abutting Bloor Street, was shown as being wooded on the Browne map. Colborne Lodge is indicated on the 1878 Miles and Co. map (Figure 2).

In or around 1851, Howard constructed another farm house and barn somewhere on Lot 37. This residence was intended for a tenant farmer, who could clear and work parts of the land. Due to his busy schedule during that period, Howard was unable to personally devote any time to farming on his estate. It is said that the tenant farmer cleared some of the land and fenced part of it in, and planted forty acres of wheat and seventy-five acres of clover. This structure may have been located about 250 yards north of Colborne Lodge, and on the east side of Grenadier Pond. This building was depicted on the Goad’s Atlas

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 10

map of 1884, but not on the 1890 rendition. It may have been demolished during the intervening period (Goad 1884 plate 36; Martyn 1978:93-94).

In November 1854, Howard sold a strip of land containing approximately two acres to the Hamilton and Toronto Railroad Company for £300. In April 1891, another strip of land was sold to the for $1,000. This is now part of the CN and CP right-of-way.

In October 1869, the Howards sold a portion of their land—possibly for road purposes—to the County of York for $60 (York deed #1014).

In November 1873, Howard deeded 120 acres of his land for use as a public park to the City of Toronto in exchange for a yearly pension of $1,200. The agreement with the City contained the further stipulation that no intoxicants were ever to be sold in the park. The remaining 45 acres of land immediately surrounding Colborne Lodge became the property of the City of Toronto upon his death, which occurred in February 1890 (York deed #3885; Martyn 1978:96).

Prior to his death, Howard had donated his library of books and other papers to the Toronto Public Library, and his surveying equipment to Upper Canada College. His estate, acquired primarily through land speculation, was valued at more than $48,000.

Howard realized a profit from his purchase—and subsequent subdivision of—nearby Lot 35. He designed and built a substantial house there in 1849 which was known as “Sunnyside.” This house, which was similar in design to Colborne Lodge, was sold to George H. Cheney, a Toronto stove manufacturer. This house later became an orphanage operated by the Sisters of St. Joseph, and during the early 1920s it was converted to become the original St. Joseph’s Hospital. This structure was demolished in 1945, to make way for the present hospital on that site (Martyn 1980:116-124).

Jemima Howard predeceased her husband, after having suffered from breast cancer, in September 1877 aged 75 years. A small fenced enclosure with a cairn is located a short distance from Colborne Lodge, where both Jemima and J.G. Howard lie interred. It is said that the iron railing once formed part of the fence which enclosed St. Paul’s Cathedral in London, England, and was designed by Sir Christopher Wren in 1714. Some of this railing was taken down in 1874, and purchased by Howard in the following year for use as an enclosure for his family plot.

In 1878, Howard was appointed “forest ranger” for High Park by the City. His responsibilities centred around improvements to the park. It is thought that many of the roads and drains in the park are Howard’s work, and undoubtedly some of the present day bridges span the creeks lie in close proximity to where Howard may have constructed bridges during the late nineteenth century. He is also known to have designed and built ornamental entrance gates and pavilions within the park (Blackett-Robinson 1885[2]:9- 81; Robertson 1894:204-211; Firth 1978:426-428; Martyn 1978:95).

Other original features near the house, which date from the period of Howard’s occupancy, include the conservatory or “glass house,” and the barn which served as an art studio for himself and Mrs. Howard. At the top of the bank in front of the house is a large brass navy gun, which Howard is said to have fired every day at dawn and dusk, as well as on special occasions such as the Queen’s birthday. Near the

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 11

cannon was a three-legged light beacon, which Howard is said to have lighted every night in order to help guide ships returning to the Humber River from the lake. This light was in existence as late as 1935, but it has since vanished. Similarly, other items known to have once existed in the gardens—such as an ornamental sun dial and several graceful hand-carved wooden swans—have also disappeared through the course of time (Martyn 1978:94).

Other structures were built within High Park during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Figure 2). These included:

• “Caretaker’s House” possibly built between 1884 and 1890, with additional surrounding buildings built between l903 and 1910, as determined from the Goad’s Atlases • “Boat House” on Grenadier Pond, possibly built between 1884 and 1890, as determined from the Goad’s Atlases • structures near the “Picnic Grounds,” and north of the Caretaker’s complex, built between 1903 and 1910, as determined from the Goad’s Atlases

Based on the overall land use history of Lots 37 and 38, it may be concluded that there is potential for the survival of archaeological resources associated with the early tenures in areas that have not been disturbed by more recent developments.

3.0 STAGE 2 FIELD SURVEY

The Stage 2 assessment was carried out in order to inventory, identify and describe any archaeological resources extant within the Bike Pit and Picnic Area 7. The survey was conducted under the field direction of Ms. Andrea Carnevale on September 17, 2009. The weather was warm and sunny. Field observations have been compiled on project mapping for the study area (Figure 3). It should be noted that the mapping provided in Figure 3 is the most detailed that is available for the purposes of the assessment.

In both areas, the assessment was carried out by means of test pitting. All test pits were excavated into sterile B-horizon sands, all material was screened through six millimetre mesh, and all soil profiles were examined. All test pits were backfilled upon completion.

3.1 The Bike Pit

The Bike Pit consists of a bowl bounded by ridges and steep slopes rising to tableland to the north and west, steep slopes descending to the Lower Duck Pond to the east and to level terrain, which may represent formerly poorly drained lands, to the south.

1

2 2. EXCAVATION OF A TEST PIT EAST OF THE PICNIC TABLES.

PICNIC AREA 7: LIMIT OF AREA TEST PITTED AT 5m INTERVALS 1. VIEW OF PICNIC AREA 7 FROM THE NORTHEAST ACROSS THE MAIN AREA TEST PITTED. PICNIC AREA 7 TEST PITS AT 5m INTERVALS

3. A TYPICAL TEST PIT PROFILE. NOTE THE SHALLOW DEPTH OF THE A-HORIZON PLOUGH ZONE.

5

4. PANORAMIC VIEW OF THE BIKE PIT FROM THE SOUTHWEST. NOTE THE EXPOSED B- AND C-HORIZON SOILS THROUGHOUT AND THE RAMPS AND JUMPS FORMED BY DIGGING AND HEAPING UP OF SOILS.

4

BIKE PIT AREA TEST PITS AS TOPGRAPHY/SOIL CONDITIONS WARRANTED

BIKE PIT AREA: LIMIT OF AREA TEST PITTED AS TOPGRAPHY/SOIL CONDITIONS WARRANTED

5. OVERLOOKING THE BOTTOM OF THE PIT FROM 6. A RARE INSTANCE OF REMNANT A-HORIZON IN 7. EXCAVATING A TEST PIT ON THE SLOPING OUTER THE NORTH RIM. THE PIT, AT THE BASE OF A TREE. RIM OF THE PIT.

LEGEND BASE: MNR OBM Sheet 10 17 6200 48300, 0 500m STAGE 2 ASSESSMENT AREA 1982 Aerial Photography, 528 Bathurst St. T 416-966-1069 Published 1985 OBM SCALE Toronto, Ontario F 416-966-9723 LOCATION AND ORIENTATION OF PHOTOGRAPH Google Aerial Photography 2009 ASI PROJECT NO.: 09SP-49 DRAWN BY: DAR Canada, M5S 2P9 [email protected]/www.iAS±.to (Date of Photo Unknown) DATE: SEPT. 21, 2009 FILE: 09SP-49 FIGURE 3.AI Figure 3: The Stage 2 Assessment of the Bike Pit and Picnic Area 7. Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 13

The placement of test pits within the bowl was constrained by extreme topography and the complete absence of original A-horizon soils throughout the majority of the area. The latter is a direct consequence of the massive disturbances that the area has experienced through the activities of the cyclists. The majority of the test pits were excavated around the rim of the bowl, as the impacts from the construction of the various bike ramps and jumps were less severe, in that A-horizon soils were preserved in these areas. The majority of this rim slopes sharply away from the bowl. As a result, the test pits, which were excavated at five metre intervals where possible, were generally excavated in areas that would not be deemed to exhibit potential under normal circumstances. A-horizon soil depths along the periphery of the bike pit were typically 15-25 cm in depth and consisted of a loamy sand.

The interior of the bowl—where construction of the ramps and jumps, and consequent effects of erosion and heavy bike traffic has resulted in the exposure of B- and C-horizon sterile subsoils—was thoroughly examined for any areas of intact A-horizon soil. Test pits were excavated in the few locales where such deposits had survived. A-horizon depths were five centimetres or less in this exceedingly compromised part of the site.

Approximately 40 test pits were excavated during the Stage 2 investigation of the Bike Pit. Despite careful scrutiny, no artifacts, other than pieces of modern trash, were encountered.

3.2 Picnic Area 7

The picnic area was tested by means of test pitting at standard five metre intervals. The A-horizon consisted of a 5-15 cm deep loamy sand plough zone overlying sterile B-horizon sands. This profile indicates that the area had been cleared for agriculture in the nineteenth century and cultivated without use of mechanized equipment, which typically results in the formation of a much deeper plough zone. It is also possible that the thin A-horizon may also be a result, in part, of some degree of soil attrition due to past landscaping activities, although no overt signs of such disturbance were noted.

Approximately 60 test pits were excavated during the Stage 2 investigation of Picnic Area 7. Despite careful scrutiny, no artifacts, other than pieces of modern trash, were encountered.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Stage 1-2 archaeological assessment of the “Bike Pit” and of Picnic Area 7 in High Park in the City of Toronto was carried out as a preliminary to the future management of both areas. The Stage 1 background research determined that no archaeological sites have been registered within either project area. One archaeological site has been registered within High Park, although there is no basis for this entry within the OASD. Two additional sites have been registered within a radius of one kilometre.

The environmental settings of the two project areas, and the land use history of the lots on which they are located, indicated that both areas exhibited potential for the presence of archaeological resources, depending upon the degree to which they had been affected by more recent landscape alterations.

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 14

The Stage 2 assessment of the Bike Pit determined that the area has been thoroughly disturbed through the unauthorized activities of cyclists, who have cut trails and built numerous ramps and jumps throughout the area, resulting in the removal of almost all original A-horizon topsoils from the area. Nevertheless, 40 test pits were excavated in those areas where some soils had survived. The majority of these were located on the slopes around the perimeter of the area of disturbance.

The Stage 2 assessment of Picnic Area 7 encountered a shallow plough-disturbed A-horizon that is the result of nineteenth-century agricultural activity prior to the creation of the park. A total of approximately 60 test pits was excavated in this area.

No archaeological resources were documented during the Stage 2 field survey in either the Bike Pit or Picnic Area 7.

In light of these results, the following recommendation is made:

1. The Bike Pit and Picnic Area 7 study areas as depicted in Figure 3 may be considered clear of further archaeological concern.

The following conditions also apply:

• This report is submitted to the Minister of Culture as a condition of licensing in accordance with Part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act, RSO 1990, c 0.18. The report is reviewed to ensure that the licensed consultant archaeologist has met the terms and conditions of their archaeological licence, and that the archaeological fieldwork and report recommendations ensure the conservation, preservation and protection of the cultural heritage of Ontario.

• Should previously undocumented archaeological resources be discovered, they may be a new archaeological site and therefore subject to Section 48 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The proponent or person discovering the archaeological resources must cease alteration of the site immediately and engage a licensed consultant archaeologist to carry out archaeological fieldwork, in compliance with sec. 48 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act.

• The Cemeteries Act requires that any person discovering human remains must immediately notify the police or coroner and the Registrar of Cemeteries, Ministry of Small Business and Consumer Services.

• The documentation related to this archaeological assessment will be curated by Archaeological Services Inc. until such a time that arrangements for their ultimate transfer to Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, or other public institution, can be made to the satisfaction of the project owner(s), the Ontario Ministry of Culture, and any other legitimate interest groups.

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 15

5.0 SOURCES

Adam, G.M. 1891 Toronto, Old and New: A Memorial Volume Historical, Descriptive and Pictorial. Mail Printing Co., Toronto. Anderson, T.W. and C.F.M. Lewis 1985 Postglacial Water Level History of the Lake Ontario Basin. In Quaternary Evolution of the Great Lakes, edited by P.F. Karrow and P.E. Calkin, pp. 231-253. Special Paper 30. Geological Association of Canada, St John’s. Anonymous n.d. Abstract Index to Deeds, Lots 36-38 Concession 1 From the Bay. City of Toronto Land Registry Office volumes 138B and 143 (microfilm reel E877). ASI (Archaeological Services Inc.) 2004 A Master Plan of Archaeological Resources for the City of Toronto (Interim Report). Prepared by Archaeological Services Inc. in association with Cuesta Systems Inc., Commonwealth Historic Resources Management Limited, Golder Associates, and Historica Research Limited. Available at http: www.toronto.ca/culture. 2008 City of Toronto Archaeological Master Plan Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment: Hawk Hill (Bear Mound “Site” — AjGu-45), High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario. Report on File, Heritage Preservation Services, City of Toronto and Culture Programs Unit, Ontario Ministry of Culture. Browne, H.J. and W.A. Browne 1880 Plan of Part of Lot 38 1st Concession From the Bay, Township of York. Plan dated May 13, 1880 and filed in the City of Toronto Land Registry Office on July 20, 1880 as Plan 477NWA. Browne, J.O. 1851 Map of the Township of York in the County of York, Upper Canada. Lithographed by J. Ellis for J.O. Browne, Toronto. Chapman, L.J., and D.F. Putnam 1984 The Physiography of Southern Ontario. Ontario Geological Survey, Special Volume 2. Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto. Coakley, J.P., and P.F. Karrow 1994 Reconstruction of Post-Iroquois Shoreline Evolution in Western Lake Ontario. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 31:1618-1629. Coleman, A.P. 1933 The Pleistocene of the Toronto Region. Ontario Department of Mines Annual Report 41 (7):1-55 Cruickshank, T., and J. De Visser 2003 Houses. Firefly Books, Toronto. Firth, E. 1966 The Town of York 1815-1834. A Further Collection of Documents of Early Toronto (Ontario Series VIII). University of Toronto Press for the Champlain Society, Toronto. 1978 John George Howard. Dictionary of Canadian Biography volume XI (1881-1890), pp. 426-428. University of Toronto Press. Goad, C.E. 1882-1923 Goad’s Atlas of the City of Toronto. Charles E. Goad, Toronto. Hills, G. A. 1959 A Ready Reference to the Description of the Land of Ontario and its Productivity. Ontario Department of Lands and Forests, Toronto. Howard, J.G. 1875 Plan of High Park. Woodworth, Unwin and Brown, Toronto. James, D. 1911 Plan to Open Road, Lot 38 Concession 1 From the Bay, Township of York. Plan dated November 15, 1911, and registered as Land Titles Plan M359 on February 27, 1912. Martyn, L. B. 1980 Aristocratic Toronto: 19th Century Grandeur. Gage Publishing Limited, Toronto. McCalla, D. 2000 George Percival Ridout. Dictionary of Canadian Biography, Volume 10. http://www.biographi.ca/

Stage 1-2 Archaeological Resource Assessment of the "Bike Pit" and Picnic Area 7, High Park, City of Toronto, Ontario Page 16

MCL (Ontario Ministry of Culture) 1997 Conserving a Future for our Past: Archaeology, Land Use Planning & Development in Ontario. Toronto: Cultural Programs Branch, Archaeology & Heritage Planning Unit. 2009 Final Draft Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. June 2009. Ontario Ministry of Culture, Toronto. Middleton, J.E. 1923 The Municipality of Toronto: A History. Dominion Publishing Co., Toronto. Miles & Co. 1878 Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of York, Ont. Miles & Co., Toronto. Passmore, F.F. 1889 Plan of Part of Lot 38 and Lot 39, Concession 1st From the Bay, In the Township of York, Shewing the Location of Ellis Avenue. Plan dated May 29, 1889 and registered as Land Titles Plan M85 on June 11, 1889. Robertson, J.R. 1894 Robertson’s Landmarks of Toronto. A Collection of Historical Sketches of the Old Town of York From 1792 until 1833, and of Toronto from 1834 to 1893. Printed at the Evening Telegram Office for J. Ross Robertson, Toronto.

Robinson, C.B. 1885 History of Toronto and County of York, Ontario. C. Blackett Robinson, Toronto. Scadding, H. 1873 Toronto of Old: Collections and Recollections Illustrative of the Early Settlement and Social Life of the Capital of Ontario. Adam, Stevenson & Co., Toronto. Sharpe, D.R. 1980 Quaternary Geology of the Toronto and Surrounding Area. Ontario Geological Survey Preliminary Map P 2204, Geological Series. Scale 1:100,000. Ontario Geological Survey, Dept of Mines and Northern Development, Sudbury. Tremaine, G. 1860 Tremaine’s Map of the County of York, Canada West. George C. Tremaine, Toronto. UFS (Urban Forestry Services) 2002 High Park Woodland & Savannah Management Plan. City of Toronto Urban Forestry Services, Parks and Recreation Division, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism. Unwin, Browne & Sankey 1883 Plan of Subdivision of Parts of Lots 36, 37, 38, and 39 Containing about240 Acres Formerly Known as Carlton Place Race Course. Unwin, Browne & Sankey, Toronto. Varga, S. 1989 High Park Oak Woodlands Area of Natural and Scientific Interest. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Central Region, Richmond Hill, Ontario. 1999 The Savannahs of High Park. In Special Places: the Changing Ecosystems of the Toronto Region, edited by Betty I. Roots, Donald A. Chant and Conrad E. Heidenreich, pp 260-265. UBC Press, Vancouver. Westgate, J., P.H. von Bitter, N. Eyles, J.H. McAndrews, V. Timmer and K.W.F. Howard 1999 The Physical Setting: a Story of Changing Environments Through Time. In Special Places: the Changing Ecosystems of the Toronto Region, edited by Betty I. Roots, Donald A. Chant and Conrad E. Heidenreich, pp 11-31. UBC Press, Vancouver.